Can We Enforce a Higher Level of Accountablity?

IMO, it is the first step in outing our hobby, first the turtles and then everything else.

You just gotta love folks like PETA and HSUS, they are real pros at getting things done.

Bobby.
I'm not sure what you mean by "outing our hobby". If you mean revealing our dirty little secrets, well, that cat has been out of the bag for some time. Most shows I attend requires that an informational page on the risks of Salmonella be distributed with reptile sales (the others have mentioned it as an upcoming requirement). The fact that we cannot rely upon people's common sense is well established...why should we expect them to take simple preventative measures, like washing hands after handling reptiles.
I would be mildly surprised to find that, in established collections of conscientious keepers, Salmonella is found in a high enough percentage to trip the alarms. It would, nonetheless, be interesting to review the findings if it comes to that. My personal interest in that information aside, this is an example of the course legislation can take. Keep in mind that the turtle farmers got their victory back in mid summer...so why has this continued to move forward? (see, my examples were NOT all in the interest of fun - that's the way things work)

Originally Posted by hhmoore

Keep in mind that the turtle farmers got their victory back in mid summer

Looks like I may have put my foot in it, with that statement. Back in mid summer, I received emails from a couple of dealers I know - notifying me of the pending vote on this bill, and requesting my support (in the form of letters). Several weeks later, I noticed a bit of buzz online about the fact that it had passed...but I neglected to followup, and check for myself. The bill in question is H.R. 924, The Domestic Pet Turtle Market Access Act of 2007 (and S.924, The Domestic Pet Turtle Market Access Act of 2007)...Which was apparently included as amendment 23 to 110th Congress: S. 1082: Food and Drug Administration Revitalization Act. According to information found at http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill...?bill=s110-540 , it passed the Senate on May 9, and was going to the House.

"...So that is what soured me to the GGC because apparently you can give someone a negative vote just because you don't like them..."

I guess it would be nice if there was a log for comments for those who vote negatively (maybe even positively), so that potential customers could look and decide for themselves whether a negative vote was really warranted. Maybe there should be a separate tally for those who have actually done business together and those who have feelings for some other reason. I don't really know if there is a solution, or what it would be. I had the feeling that is was working for an overwhelming majority of users, but of course I have no way to know that for sure. I do see that a fair number of original GGC holders are no longer listed, but whether it is because they are out of business, found the membership more than they wanted to pay, found it ineffective, had some problem with it (as you mentioned), or wanted to let it expire for some other reason, I have no way of knowing. If there have been problems for a significant number, maybe Rich will entertain ways to make it more useful, if there are solutions to the problems encountered by its users.

Seems like the sellers with 95% positive ratings on eBay do well with that percentage. There is always the possibility of an impossible to please customer coming back to haunt you, so I don't think potential buyers would punish a seller with just a couple of negative comments / votes.

Whatever the problems, I am sorry to hear that it has not worked for everyone as well as I had hoped it would.

This has all been addressed before. There is just no way to enforce a requirement that voters have actually done business with the GGC holder. How would you do so? What proof would be sufficiently ironclad to qualify? And who would be the one to spend their time trying to determine the acceptability of such offered "proof"?

Honestly, my programmer and I are discussing an upgrade to this message board software and I have a whole list of custom coding mods to look over and determine whether or not they will go into the upgrade. Every one of them will have to be completely recoded in the new version, so I am looking at a significant cost for this upgrade. So anything not really worthwhile, either from my perspective, or from the members they were designed to be for, will likely be getting the axe. Obviously, the GGC program is one of them under scrutiny. If you all feel it is worthless, then I certainly don't need to have it here.

Originally Posted by WebSlave

This has all been addressed before. There is just no way to enforce a requirement that voters have actually done business with the GGC holder. How would you do so? What proof would be sufficiently ironclad to qualify? And who would be the one to spend their time trying to determine the acceptability of such offered "proof"?

Honestly, my programmer and I are discussing an upgrade to this message board software and I have a whole list of custom coding mods to look over and determine whether or not they will go into the upgrade. Every one of them will have to be completely recoded in the new version, so I am looking at a significant cost for this upgrade. So anything not really worthwhile, either from my perspective, or from the members they were designed to be for, will likely be getting the axe. Obviously, the GGC program is one of them under scrutiny. If you all feel it is worthless, then I certainly don't need to have it here.

For what it's worth I found Fauna because I made my first on line animal purchase from a small breeder that displayed his GGC standing on his website. I clicked on it and it brought me to this site where I made a 2nd purchase from another good guy.I looked around and ended becoming a paid member.I too have seen the GGC mentioned on other sites as a vote of confidence as well as seeing people frequently steered to the BOI for guidance when considering making a purchase.

It is true that the GGC will be most helpful for relative newbies. BUT - even experienced, long term breeder with good reps may not be well known to newbie potential customers. But if the novices are steered towards the BOI, they will be introduced to experienced breeders as well as new breeders.

I feel the system has a lot of merit, and will increase in value with time and recognition. But whether enough people agree to be worth while to continue it is of course something only Rich can answer.

Yeah............... I guess after years of hearing so many people saying what this or that on this site is worth to THEM on the bottom line, it's been rubbing off on me. So more and more, I have to think about what something here is worth to ME in order to implement or continue it. I guess I'll know more when I get the list off to my programmer and see what the itemized expenses are going to be for the upgrade.

As for the admonition to give the GGC more time, jiminy Christmas, it's been in existence almost three years now.......

Originally Posted by WebSlave

As for the admonition to give the GGC more time, jiminy Christmas, it's been in existence almost three years now.......

How long does it take to prove out a new morph?

I'd give it 5 to 7 years, let some of the youngsters and newbs get used to it, heck, find out about it at all, before I considered pulling the plug on it.

Be patient old man.

I don't know the percentage of positive and negative feedback you get about the GGC - isn't it much more positive than negative? I feel it is already helpful. But I think no matter how long it is in effect, it will become more valuable with time.

It is amazing to me how many people DON'T know about the BOI and the rest of Fauna, including GGC. I have sent MANY newbies to the BOI to check things out, as I am sure many others have. Most of the novices are totally amazed that such a thing as the BOI even exists. The more time that passes, the more people will hear about it and make use of it. Sure would be nice if it could be advertised or discussed in more places where beginners hang out - they are the ones who need to know about it.